On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 9:32 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
>> +1 on getting rid of the IOBase __del__ in the C rewrite in favor of
>> tp_dealloc.
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Christian Heimes wrote:
>>>
>>> Brett Cannon schrieb:
"Martin v. Löwis" writes:
> > I've also had fruitless discussions about adding OpenID
> > authentication to Roundup.
>
> Did you offer patches to roundup during these discussions?
I grabbed the source code, but got lost trying to figure out how
Roundup does authentication internally. So, no pat
> I've also had fruitless discussions about adding OpenID authentication
> to Roundup.
Did you offer patches to roundup during these discussions?
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/p
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
> +1 on getting rid of the IOBase __del__ in the C rewrite in favor of
> tp_dealloc.
>
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Christian Heimes wrote:
>>
>> Brett Cannon schrieb:
>> > Fine by me. People should be using the context manager for g
+1 on getting rid of the IOBase __del__ in the C rewrite in favor of
tp_dealloc.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Brett Cannon schrieb:
> > Fine by me. People should be using the context manager for guaranteed
> > file closure anyway IMO.
>
Yes they should. (how I re
In article ,
Barry Scott wrote:
> What is the replacement for bundlebuilder for 3.0? Lack of
> bundlebuilder becomes a serious porting problem for me.
> I deliver pysvn WOrkbench as a bundle to simplify installation
> by my users.
Most people are using py2app these days to produce OSX applicatio
Calvin Spealman writes:
> I would like to see that kind of coherence. I think anything that gets
> in the way of someone getting in is in danger of holding someone off
> from contributing something, be it wiki edits, bug reports, or
> packages. One might also ask about the mailman lists here.
Th
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 6:25 PM, wrote:
>
>Mark> Is it acceptable to commit a change (to the trunk or py3k, not to
>Mark> the release branches) solely for the purpose of getting more
>Mark> information about a failure?
>
> I think it would be kind of nice if you could force a buildbot
Mark> Is it acceptable to commit a change (to the trunk or py3k, not to
Mark> the release branches) solely for the purpose of getting more
Mark> information about a failure?
I think it would be kind of nice if you could force a buildbot to use a
specific branch. You could then check
Brett Cannon schrieb:
> Fine by me. People should be using the context manager for guaranteed
> file closure anyway IMO.
You make a very good point! Perhaps we should stop promising that files
get closed as soon as possible and encourage people in using the with
statement.
Christian
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 15:03, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Dear python-dev,
>
> The Python implementation of IOBase, the base class for everything IO, has the
> (strange) idea to define a __del__ method. It is probably meant to avoid code
> duplication, so that users subclassing IOBase automatically g
Dear python-dev,
The Python implementation of IOBase, the base class for everything IO, has the
(strange) idea to define a __del__ method. It is probably meant to avoid code
duplication, so that users subclassing IOBase automatically get the
close-on-destruct behaviour.
(there is an even stranger
The config.guess/.sub files in python/trunk/Modules/_ctypes/libffi are
from , which is just before Haiku was finally added to the offical
versions from gnulib.
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=config.git;a=blob_plain;f=config.guess;hb=HEAD
and
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=config.git;
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 14:49, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>>> What is the specific checkin? What specific builds failed?
>>>
>>
>> How about one that just happened:
>> http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/3.x.stable/sparc%20solaris10%20gcc%203.x/builds/126
>> . If you look at the python-checkins for t
>> What is the specific checkin? What specific builds failed?
>>
>
> How about one that just happened:
> http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/3.x.stable/sparc%20solaris10%20gcc%203.x/builds/126
> . If you look at the python-checkins for the revision
> (http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-checkin
I'm glad someone sent this out... I was having this EXACT problem today
I've got it installed on my wife's computer and I'm certain that it worked
when I first installed 3.0a but it stopped working (I didn't update Python
but my wife has done several Vista security updates)... Hopefully, that will
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> So, the question is -
>> should we open a ticket for Single Sign-On system for *.python.org or
>> it bugs only me?
>
> Submission of tickets is futile. Code talks.
>
And don't forget that while a common authentication base is fine, you
need to ensure that various service
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 14:22, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>
>> All I know is that I checked in a test that failed on all
>> case-sensitive file system for py3k (3.1) and there does not appear to
>> be a single email about it. And the buildbots very clearly had the
>> chance to fail.
>
> What is the
> All I know is that I checked in a test that failed on all
> case-sensitive file system for py3k (3.1) and there does not appear to
> be a single email about it. And the buildbots very clearly had the
> chance to fail.
What is the specific checkin? What specific builds failed?
Regards,
Martin
_
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 01:53, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
>> I just realized that I had not received any emails on python-checkins
>> about the buildbot failures I accidentally caused. And then I noticed
>> that I had not gotten any emails for py3k in a while. Did that get
>> s
Apparently, if you install Python into a localized
version of \Program Files on Vista (such as \Programas,
or \Programmer), IDLE fails to start; see
http://bugs.python.org/3881
Apparently, Tcl cannot properly initialize on such a system,
and apparently, this is related to these folders being
symli
> So, the question is -
> should we open a ticket for Single Sign-On system for *.python.org or
> it bugs only me?
Submission of tickets is futile. Code talks.
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mail
I would like to see that kind of coherence. I think anything that gets
in the way of someone getting in is in danger of holding someone off
from contributing something, be it wiki edits, bug reports, or
packages. One might also ask about the mailman lists here.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 2:21 PM, ana
anatoly techtonik wrote:
Hello,
Should we open a ticket to make a single sign-on service for *.python.org sites?
There are at least 3 logins there may be more, for example if we are
going to make some online content edition/comment system for docs.
These are:
bugs.python.org
wiki.python.org
pyp
Hello,
Should we open a ticket to make a single sign-on service for *.python.org sites?
There are at least 3 logins there may be more, for example if we are
going to make some online content edition/comment system for docs.
These are:
bugs.python.org
wiki.python.org
pypi.python.org
History
> Is it acceptable to commit a change (to the trunk or py3k, not to
> the release branches) solely for the purpose of getting more
> information about a failure?
[...]
> Alternatively, is it reasonable to create a new branch solely
> for the purpose of tracking down one particular problem?
Either
Mark Dickinson wrote:
This is probably a stupid question, but here goes:
Can anyone suggest good strategies for debugging buildbot
test failures, for problems that aren't reproducible locally?
There have been various times in the past that I've wanted
to be able to do this. Right now, I'm thin
This is probably a stupid question, but here goes:
Can anyone suggest good strategies for debugging buildbot
test failures, for problems that aren't reproducible locally?
There have been various times in the past that I've wanted
to be able to do this. Right now, I'm thinking particularly of
the
On 17 Jan 2009, at 20:08, Ned Deily wrote:
In article <7043cb7c-18f4-4e16-ae0c-cda6ba311...@barrys-emacs.org>,
Barry Scott wrote:
It seems that the packaging of Mac Python 2.6 is missing at least one
file
that is critical to the operation of bundlebuilder.py.
I've logged the issue as http:/
Brett Cannon wrote:
> I just realized that I had not received any emails on python-checkins
> about the buildbot failures I accidentally caused. And then I noticed
> that I had not gotten any emails for py3k in a while. Did that get
> switched off on purpose?
I'm not even sure that anything change
Brett Cannon wrote:
> I just realized that I had not received any emails on python-checkins
> about the buildbot failures I accidentally caused. And then I noticed
> that I had not gotten any emails for py3k in a while. Did that get
> switched off on purpose?
No, it did not get switched off at all
31 matches
Mail list logo
